2014 (10) TMI 165

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondent : Shri M. Rammohan Rao, JC (AR) JUDGEMENT Per P.K. Das; 1. As the issue lies on a narrow compass, after disposing the stay application we take up the appeal for hearing. 2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appeal was filed beyond the condonable period under Section 85 of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was amended on 28.5.2012 and thereafter the adjudicating authority has not amended the Preamble of the adjudication order. So the appellant should not be punished for the wrong act on the part of Revenue. Ld. Advocate relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Bansal Ispat udyog Vs CCE Bhopal - 2003 (160) ELT 813 (Tri.-Del.). 4. On the other hand, Ld.A.R on behalf of the Revenue s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Singh Enterprises (supra) held as under :-             "8. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as also the Tribunal being creatures of Statute are vested with jurisdiction to condone the delay beyond the permissible period provided under the Statute. The period upto which the prayer for con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal. The proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 35 makes the position crystal clear that the appellate authority has no power to allow the appeal to be presented beyond the period of 30 days. The language used makes the position clear that the legislature intended the appellate authority to entertain the appeal by condoning delay only upto 30 days after the expiry of 60 days which is the normal ....